User avatar
By Thomas An.
#35475
Micha wrote:Yes, after I post it here. Good idea, I hope the NL team read it.

PS: For me, it is more as only a wish. :wink:
Well, you are right, it is a missing feature... but... I don't think it isa bug.
A bug is when a *current* feature has a problem or a crash.

I don't know why this one was left out from the camera controls.
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#35521
Assigning reflection maps into metals cause the object to render black.

Does anyone see this as well ?
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#35536
ginosso wrote: - bump and clip map that are positioned in different way of color texture map of the same resolution on the surfaces.
I can't repeat this one. Can you explain a little more ?

I do see that something is up with the clip maps. I see some artifacts that were not there before.
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#38211
ginosso wrote:...now it works but i have strange reflections on the cut away surface...
There is a problem right now with clipmaps, but it is not a Rhinoll bug.

Strange reflections:
Image
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#38685
Hi everyone,

I have discovered that the material loss problem still persists (at least for large scenes with over 1000 materials).
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#39152
Thomas An. wrote:Hi everyone,

I have discovered that the material loss problem still persists (at least for large scenes with over 1000 materials).
Method to repeat the problem (Rhinoll beta 0.6)
  1. Draw a box, assign a diffuse material (e.g green)
  2. Use the "array" command (Rhino) and make 55x55 = 3025 copies
  3. draw a ground plane and emitter plane and render
  4. delete all boxes except the one on the lower left corner
  5. Use the "array" command (Rhino) and make another 55x55 = 3025 copies
  6. Select all objects except one and give them a different diffuse color (e.g. red)
  7. render (notice that the material assignation goes all the way up to 6000 ! )
  8. delete most of the grid except a 5x5 square
  9. save
  10. Reopen the file --> notice some materials are lost
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#39564
Micha wrote:
Micha wrote:Befor some weeks I have post that I find a way, that the Rhino camera and the Maxwell camera match together. I think, here is a bug that should be fixed.

See also: http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2124
No meaning from somebody? Do nobody interfere this?
Hi Micha,

I saw your comment and you are most likely correct, but I need some time to run some tests on my end too, before putting it up there.
User avatar
By Micha
#39567
Good, I have an other question more: Do the bump bug means, that we could get a stronger bump effect in the future? In a scene with a big stone ground I would wish to get more bump.
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#39577
Micha wrote:Good, I have an other question more: Do the bump bug means, that we could get a stronger bump effect in the future? In a scene with a big stone ground I would wish to get more bump.
What you see now is basic bump, but it is so good it looks like displacement.

Oscar once mentioned that we will get true displacement with Maxwell at some point:
27 jan 2005
..displacement is very important, and it will be avalaible in a few months.
About the -999, +999 range: It is mentioned because this is how the Max plugin is setup (as seen in Tom's reference). The negative values would reverse the bump. I see you can get a range from 0-1000 using diffuse in Rhinoll right now (but not plastic).
User avatar
By Thomas An.
#39601
Micha wrote:
Micha wrote:Befor some weeks I have post that I find a way, that the Rhino camera and the Maxwell camera match together. I think, here is a bug that should be fixed.

See also: http://www.maxwellrender.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=2124
No meaning from somebody? Do nobody interfere this?
ok Micha,

I see what you mean in regards to this.
The bug-list is now updated :)
User avatar
By Micha
#39615
Thomas, thank you.
OutDoor Scenery Question

you said: After you apply the image to the polygo[…]

fixed! thank you - customer support! -Ed